Sorry, I responded too quickly. I meant to say, of course:
Please don't try speaking for "everyone"
And I meant to explain more clearly that pettifogger wasn't attacking anyone -- on either side. I don't see why you thought he was.
Do you "appreciate" where my analysis of where the other side is coming from? If not, why? You can't reject my analysis without rejecting his, because both have an equal basis in fact (...none). The important thing is whether or not they are
CORRECT, not whether or not they are aguing for the "right" reasons.
Sorry, but divining the motives of others is an ad hominem attack at worst and a straw man fallacy (inventing an argument, imputing your opponent's support or agreement with it, then arguing against the position you just invented) at best. Why is the reason that the posters here hold their opinions of any importance? Only the evidence for the argument matters, not the "motive."